What do you think about 3D? Do you like it? Hate it? Think it's better than 4K?

[that1guystudios]

Here's where to come if you want to share your opinions about 3D being an amazing revolution in technology, or a stupid money-grabbing fad. Feel free to voice your opinions here, but keep the conversations civilized...or consider yourselves warned! All negative 3D discussions and threads will be moved to this part of the forum, so that the rest can remain positive!

[Minimejer05]

Well when 3D was first getting big(again) in theaters I didnt mind. I liked Avatar and How To Train Your Dragon and such... but now whenever I see something advertised to come out in 3D I kinda shrug my shoulders. I really am getting sick of wearing the glasses and I noticed LOTS of people moan when they see a 3D tag at the end of a trailer.

Now Ive only experienced home theater 3D at the Best Buy demo. My only main gripe is that I finally bought a new TV last year and it wasnt a 3D TV. I dont plan on buying another TV for 5 years or so and if there is a 3D TV out than I guess thats what I will get.

Its just so much harder upgrading TV's than formats. When I went from DVD to Blu I just bought a PS3 and slowly starting replacing titles as long as they weren't to spendy. But TV's arent something I buy a lot. Usually its once every 5-7 years. So if I have a great TV now I dont see the point in upgrading to 3D until this TV dies on me.

[Lovemy3D]

They just need to quit with the conversions and stick to filming with 3D cameras. If they want to take some older movies and convert them over, I think that's fine. But anything new should be done only with real 3D cameras.
Especially if they want to charge the same as the real 3D.

As far as the 3D blu-ray goes, so far I'm 100% satisfied.

[turay]

I doubt 3D technology will fail again. It has one huge advantage that is mostly overlooked: It clears the last hurdle for 3D photography to succeed!

Making 3D digital photos is easy (relatively) and anyone who has ever seen some simple 3D vacation pictures on a big screen 3D TV will be hooked for life.

This new convergence aspect has been largely ignored by the TV manufacturers. They don't advertise this new fantastic option, Samsung even fails to support any of the existing 3D photo formats, and even those that do (like Panasonic and LG - yet unconfirmed) don't mention this new feature.
Interestingly, I haven't seen any 3D TV review yet that mentions the need for a 3D TV to be able to display 3D photos.

If you would like to try 3D photography and plan on buying a Samsung 3D TV then you should definitely wait until they fixed this problem. If Panasonic is your brand of choice you should be fine.

[AutomaticDriver]

I personally love the new 3D.

Everybody has their own opinion on 3D. I understand that and I respect that.

I understand people hate wearing glasses while watching a movie. People dont like wearing glasses when they already wear a pair for everyday life. 3D gives them a headache. Again I understand 100% why people dont like 3D right now.

2 things I dont understand.

First, I was reading a review for a crysis 2. They go on and talk about the 3D in it. They said the 3D makes the game take a step sideways or backwards. It doesnt immerse you(or whatever the guy said). How could a person say that about 3D? I thought that was the whole Idea of this version of 3D. To immerse you into the game/movie better than ever.

The other thing I dont understand. Sometimes I see people online writing about not liking 3D. They say something like" I have never been to a 3D movie or played 3D games. I hate 3D and wish it would die already.

Since they said they never seen 3D stuff before(atleast thats how I understand it). Then how can they say they dont like it?

Also why would someone want them to get rid of 3D all together? To me that is being selfish. There are alot of people that really enjoy 3D now because its not the crappy red/blue paper glasses. Last time I looked if there is a 3D version of a movie there is always a 2D version. Atleast thats that my theater does. So there is an option.

[D_M]

To me it's a gimmick and I'm going to pass.

[AutomaticDriver]

Originally Posted by D_M

To me it's a gimmick and I'm going to pass.

I understand where your coming from. It seems every 10 years 3D comes out and then goes away. I am hoping that it will stay for good and continue to get better and better as years go by. Even though I really like 3D now I still I hope there will always be a option. If People dont want to have anything to do 3D they are not forced to.

[AutomaticDriver]

Originally Posted by Lovemy3D

They just need to quit with the conversions and stick to filming with 3D cameras. If they want to take some older movies and convert them over, I think that's fine. But anything new should be done only with real 3D cameras.
Especially if they want to charge the same as the real 3D.

As far as the 3D blu-ray goes, so far I'm 100% satisfied.

I agree with you.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by that1guypictures

Here is a place to express negative opinions, thoughts and experiences with the 3-D blu-ray format and current display technology. Keep the discussions civil or comments will be deleted. Thanks!

I like the idea of providing a forum for those who don't care for the past, current, and potentially "future" 3D media, but I agree that civility is essential.....

For me, I have seen the demos (and that's all.... so perhaps some calibrated system could woo me, but I doubt it) and my biggest issue is this: "The resolution is gone" you see a great deal of "blurred lines". I don't want to make it sound like it's a big blurry mess, because it's certainly not, the PQ while in motion loses a great deal of resolution (or perhaps perceived resolution is a better way to describe it)

I just wish more directors would utilize the Blu-ray format to film more on 65 and 70mm film stock, which has a lot of natural "depth" to it, since it can now be appreciated that much more in the home environment, rather than saying "we can do 3D now, so we will, because there is going to be a built in audience for it"

I'm one who also has issue with the need to wear glasses during the presentation, just as I would have issue to wearing headphones if some new technology came out that required it (I know it's not a perfect comparison) because I look at it as a limiting factor.

I haven't seen a 3D film in a theater since seeing something at an IMAX in Las Vegas about 3 years ago, and it was some sort of pre-historic ocean/sea creature thing, and it looked terrible, but that could have been the production qualities..... but seeing the Demos in-store of what they can currently do on Blu-ray certainly doesn't make me want to watch 3D at home.

I'm also not just saying "I don't want to invest in it", because if I had the option to view any of my current films in my collection in 3D, I would choose not to, because the Blu-ray resolution, clarity, depth, etc I'm currently experiencing looks much better than the demos I've seen of 3D.

Originally Posted by bluflu

Here's a summary of what's to follow:

1. Things look better in 2D. I certainly believe so.

2. I can't see 3D. Not sure what you mean.... unless it's a one-eyed guy

3. 3D gives me a headache. LEGITIMATE for some.

4. I don't want to wear glasses. LEGITIMATE

5. 3D is too expensive. One should still be able to formulate a negative opinion, much like one can formulate a positive one that leads to the decision to buy a 3-D ready set

6. I just bought a 2D HDTV. This shouldn't have any bearing on one's perception of the format

7. 3D is a gimmick/sux! This would be a comment that is 1/2 legitimate, being that it could be argued to be a "gimmick" but the latter part is worthless without an explanation.

Why not give the benefit of the doubt before assuming people are going to make baseless arguments..... Are you crapping in the official crapping thread

EDIT:

how many threads did you post the same reply in??? I see three so far.

[PaulGo]

Report: 3DTV Not Ready for Prime Time
July 28, 2010 | Steve Donohue

While 3DTV may be gaining momentum from the consumer electronics industry, Hollywood, and TV programmers, the technology doesn’t yet warrant significant investment from cable operators, according to the latest Cable Industry Insider report from Heavy Reading.

Full article at:

http://www.lightreading.com/document...eklynewsletter

[Dr Mike]

2. I can't see 3D. Not sure what you mean.... unless it's a one-eyed guy

Well I'm someone who can't see 3D even though I have two eyes! To cut a long story short - had what is known as a 'lazy eye' as a child. If this is left untreated you go blind in that eye (the optic nerve whithers). The treatment is to put a patch over the good eye, forcing the brain to use the lazy eye so it works properly. This is done at the age (under 4) when your brain is working out how to use two eyes for depth perception so although I have two working eyes they don't really work together to produce propper stereoscopic vision (if something is on the left side of my nose, my left eye sees it and if it's on the right side of my nose, my right eye sees it). I'm sure I'm not the only person in the world with condition but I don't know how common it is.

So 3D TV or cinema has always been wasted on me so I've never really bothered about it. Obviously I haven't tried out the new generation of 3D tech but I have to say the glasses look like they could not be comfortably worn over normal spectacles, and that is excluding a much bigger slice of the population.

[PaulGo]

Analyst: 3D Going to the ‘Cats & Dogs’


By : Erik Gruenwedel | Posted: 02 Aug 2010

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/3-d...ats-dogs-20192

[that1guystudios]

Originally Posted by Dr Mike

Obviously I haven't tried out the new generation of 3D tech but I have to say the glasses look like they could not be comfortably worn over normal spectacles, and that is excluding a much bigger slice of the population.

I actually feel like the 3D glasses are less distracting when I am wearing my normal glasses already. I actually prefer to wear my glasses instead of my contacts when I watch the Panasonic because the glasses almost fit and latch together. Everyone's mileage will vary with this of course, but I find no problem with wearing both pairs of glasses at the same time.

[Lovemy3D]

Wasn't Cats And Dogs a conversion?

I went to see it the other day. There were some 3D previews leading up to the movie that just blew me away, they looked so good. I particularly liked the one with the hang-gliding. I can't remember what it was called. When Cats And Dogs Came on, the 3D was noticeably not as good. Wasn't so great a movie either. What about Step Up and Piranha? Real, or converted?

Again, they need to end the converting or they will probably kill 3D. I have high hopes for Resident Evil.

[Dr Mike]

Originally Posted by that1guypictures

I actually feel like the 3D glasses are less distracting when I am wearing my normal glasses already. I actually prefer to wear my glasses instead of my contacts when I watch the Panasonic because the glasses almost fit and latch together. Everyone's mileage will vary with this of course, but I find no problem with wearing both pairs of glasses at the same time.

Interesting to hear. My view was based on the problem I have with safety glasses. It seems to be beyond the whit of man to design a pair that can be worn over regular specs!

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Dr Mike

Well I'm someone who can't see 3D even though I have two eyes! To cut a long story short - had what is known as a 'lazy eye' as a child. If this is left untreated you go blind in that eye (the optic nerve whithers). The treatment is to put a patch over the good eye, forcing the brain to use the lazy eye so it works properly. This is done at the age (under 4) when your brain is working out how to use two eyes for depth perception so although I have two working eyes they don't really work together to produce propper stereoscopic vision (if something is on the left side of my nose, my left eye sees it and if it's on the right side of my nose, my right eye sees it). I'm sure I'm not the only person in the world with condition but I don't know how common it is.

So 3D TV or cinema has always been wasted on me so I've never really bothered about it. Obviously I haven't tried out the new generation of 3D tech but I have to say the glasses look like they could not be comfortably worn over normal spectacles, and that is excluding a much bigger slice of the population.

Your not alone in that regard. Around 4% of the population suffer from some form of eye condition that causes stereo-blindness and can't percieve proper depth and thus 3D movies will always be useless for them no matter what technology is used.

I have family who suffer from a condition similar to yours so I sympathize. Thats why 3D should always be an option. Thankfully 3D Blu-Rays have backwards compatibility and the 3D can be turned off for the stereo blind or those who simpley don't like glasses. I wouldn't support mandating 3D until glasses can be eliminated.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Lovemy3D

Wasn't Cats And Dogs a conversion?

I went to see it the other day. There were some 3D previews leading up to the movie that just blew me away, they looked so good. I particularly liked the one with the hang-gliding. I can't remember what it was called. When Cats And Dogs Came on, the 3D was noticeably not as good. Wasn't so great a movie either. What about Step Up and Piranha? Real, or converted?

Again, they need to end the converting or they will probably kill 3D. I have high hopes for Resident Evil.

Step Up is native 3D

Piranha is converted

Conversions are very common. The upcoming Marvel movies (Thor and Captain America) and the upcoming Harry Potter and Chronicles of Narnia movies are all conversions

Conversions won't kill 3D if there done right meaning given proper time and money but cheap quickies like The Last Airbender and Clash of the Titans need to be stopped imediately. Resident Evil Afterlife makes a point to empasize that its a native 3D production. That indicates there is a backlash against quick conversions. Personally I hope native 3D will take over and that shooting in 2D will be soon comparible to shooting in black and white.

[that1guystudios]

I don't mind 3D conversions, as long as they done with care, and are supervised and approved by the Director. Personally I thought Alice in Wonderland was a great conversion. There were very few "comin' at ya" effects, it just added simple depth to an already visually stunning (IMHO) film.
The first two Toy Story films and Nightmare Before Christmas all were great conversions in my opinion.

[Lovemy3D]

Ok, Thank you Jimmy Smith.

Lets just hope that the upcoming 3D conversions are done right, and with care. It will be interesting to see the difference between Step Up and Resident Evil. Compared to piranha, Harry Potter, and Narnia. I'm very happy Resident Evil is not going to be a conversion, and will come to blu-ray 3D shortly. I'm a fan of the series, and of zombies in general. I never did see Alice In Wonderland, so I can't comment on that until it comes to blue-ray 3D. And this is the first I've heard of Thor and Captain America.

I hope you are right about native 3D taking over.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Lovemy3D

Ok, Thank you Jimmy Smith.

Lets just hope that the upcoming 3D conversions are done right, and with care. It will be interesting to see the difference between Step Up and Resident Evil. Compared to piranha, Harry Potter, and Narnia. I'm very happy Resident Evil is not going to be a conversion, and will come to blu-ray 3D shortly. I'm a fan of the series, and of zombies in general. I never did see Alice In Wonderland, so I can't comment on that until it comes to blue-ray 3D.

And this is the first I've heard of Thor and Captain America.

The trailer to Chrionciles of Narnia Voyage of Dawn Treader looked very good in convered 3D. Almost as good as the native 3D feature that followed (Toy Story 3). Fox seems to have devoted a good amont of time to the movie and I think we have little to fear in that regard.

The 3D trailer to Pirhanna on the other hand looked awful. The depth looked unatural like cardboard cutouts and the special effects were only a small step above the sci-fi channel. Unless that movie is revamped immensely I think we could be in for another Clash of the Titans with that one.